The civility initiative, part 8: a new proposed statement!

     Today, members of the IVC “civility and mutual respect” workgroup received a draft of a college “statement” based on the work of that group, especially at its meeting last Friday (about which we reported).

     It is likely that the draft was written by John Spevak, the consultant who has assisted in the process since November.
     Here it is:

     The statement does seem to reflect what was emphasized at last week’s workshop. It is surely a huge improvement over the unfortunate draft that Spevak produced after the December (i.e., the first) workshop—something that occasioned dismay.

     First of all, it emphasizes the importance to our community of free speech, something that the last draft did not mention. Indeed, it speaks of encouraging the expression of opinions, whatever they might be. It seizes upon the notion of “professionalism,” which seemed to be the moniker de jour for standards of acceptable conduct at last Friday’s workshop.

     The statement also boldly embraces what others might regard as a fallacy: regarding the expression of a commitment to X as though it were what produces or constitutes that commitment.

     Know what I mean? Suppose someone thinks that I am uncivil. I listen to him/her and then announce and publish my “commitment to civility.” Have I thereby achieved my being civil? Of course not. Indeed, I might have succeeded in elevating my uncivil obnoxiousness to new heights!

     To be fair, the statement goes on to mention other mechanisms to achieve “civility and mutual respect,” etc., beyond publishing the college's “commitment.” It mentions:

• proactive education of employees [We'd better keep our eye on this one]
• sponsoring activities that bring members of the community together [yep]
• regular open forums for an open discussion of issues [yep]
• maintaining, open, inclusive, and transparent decision-making processes [yep]

     STEEPAGE. Things do get a bit murky toward the end of the statement, where there is talk of a “peer-driven process” for “dispute resolution” in which “all of the governance groups participate.” This process, we’re told, is “steeped in finding mutually agreeable solutions.”

     Can a dispute resolution process be “steeped [i.e., soaked] in finding…solutions”? Can it be “steeped” [i.e., soaked] in mutually agreeableness?

"Steeped" in felinity

     It is customary, I suppose, to talk the talk of “working toward a commitment to X” by declaring a commitment to X. That’s bullshit, of course, but I guess if we say it quickly and then move on to more sensible pronouncements, everything should be OK.

     I do object to that second line, where the “college encourages an atmosphere of professionalism….” Well, it either does that or it doesn’t, and proclaiming that it does is just, well, obnoxious, under the circumstances. Why not use the language of the last sentence of paragraph 1? –That stuff about the college “seeking to establish” transparency, etc.? Saying you seek to establish X is a humbler and far less pompous and bullshitty way to yammer, if you ask me.

     But I want to be positive. This draft is definitely moving in the right direction. 

     What do you think?

"Action plan." I.e., What we're gonna do about it. Each "action step" is the inclusion
of the statement in some manual or catalog. Really. I think they should add "dance steps," too.
The hokey pokey maybe.

The draft was sent to all members of the workgroup. It was explained thus: 

     Attached is the draft, developed by all of the table leaders and John Spevak, of an IVC statement on freedom of expression, civility, and mutual respect, as well as an IVC action plan that accompanies it.     Please review and send comments to any or all facilitators by 5 p.m., this Thursday, April 5.. . .     After April 5, the table leaders and John Spevak will review all comments and based on that review create a second draft that will be send to you and the entire IVC community by April 13.     Thank you, again.

Aim for the body rare, you'll see it on TV
The worst thing in 1954 was the Bikini
See the girl on the TV dressed in a Bikini
She doesn't think so but she's dressed for the H-Bomb
(For the H-Bomb)
I found that essence rare, it's what I looked for
I knew I'd get what I asked for